MICA flight path

[Corsair]

Hello guys,
Playing on FO Balkans campaign (and confirmed in standard Korea dogfight) I noticed that the MICA missiles (EM and IR) are following a very highly lofted flight path - even too high, since at “long” distance shots (15 - 35 nm with MICA IR) the missiles passes behind its target.

Let me explain with an ACMI (MICA IR shot from 22nm - three other missiles shot from 38 to 25 nm failed):

http://www.2shared.com/file/DQq52358/TAPE0005.html

Tests were realized with a straight flying target, with speed going from 300 to 500 kts.

Anyone knows if this is intended, or represent accurate flight path? That seems very strange too me, as the missiles still has a lot of energy (around 1000 kts upon the missed impact) and could easily foresee the target’s path and correct its trajectory).

Thanks,
Corsair

[Corsair]

nobody?

[Axe]

I don’t know what to make of your pictures, it’s not a tape ie .vhs

If I could understand it, I’d give a go today in DF arena and see if I can find the trouble you speak of.

regards

[Corsair]

Here is the full tape:
http://www.2shared.com/file/DQq52358/TAPE0005.html

[Axe]

I see what you’re talking about in the tape:

I’ll try it in DF and see on my end.

[molnibalage]

The modeling values do not justify some kind of fligh path.

0.8 # Lofting Bias
7 # Missile loft time

IMHO the whole MICA IR is pointless because as I know BMS is not able to siumlate the RL LoaL BVR applying method insted gives very high unreal IR seeker to provide lock capability in BVR. What is unreal? 486080 feet. This is 148 km… This totally screws the RPM sensitivity and change of defeating by flares.

[Agave_Blue]

I saw this in the recent RedFlag as well. I had (have?) and ACMI of it, but no where to host a download (if I can even find it).

[Axe]

Did some DF’ing. the Mica IR always passed over me like in your tape. But the Mica EM were hitting consistantly. That’s without any maneuvers and no countermeasures too.

[snarble]

Mica IR (the EM probably too-and no husky state?)has a very small sensor range, you need to support your missiles…

[molnibalage]

@snarble:

Mica IR (the EM probably too-and no husky state?)has a very small sensor range, you need to support your missiles…

Pls. check ICD58… Range 486080 feet… Check for ex. ICD 9 and ICD1. These are used by AA-11 and AIM-9M.

[Corsair]

@snarble:

Mica IR (the EM probably too-and no husky state?)has a very small sensor range, you need to support your missiles…

Supporting missiles is not the problem as you clearly see in the ACMI that the missile has a ‘lock’ on the target (green line in TacView).
Anyway, I’d love to see this problem adressed - I don’t see the point of using an extended range AIM-9P…

@molnibalage:

IMHO the whole MICA IR is pointless because as I know BMS is not able to siumlate the RL LoaL BVR applying method insted gives very high unreal IR seeker to provide lock capability in BVR.

Well, what is the point of using AMRAAM or other highly clissified missiles then? I’m pretty sure there is no more than the third of units in BMS that behave as they actually are supposed to. A sim is full of compromose and I guess that the very early lock on the MICA IR is a pretty good compromise in order to represent its real supposed capacities, if we consider Link 16 and other datalink systems that would able to provide plane-missile link.

[molnibalage]

Anyway, I’d love to see this problem adressed - I don’t see the point of using a 30nm AIM-9P…

I simply do not understand what you wished to explain here.

[Corsair]

@molnibalage:

I simply do not understand what you wished to explain here.

Pretty much the problem exposed in my first post: having a missile that is not even capable of hitting a target in its shoot enveloppe…

[Snax]

Hi everyone,
I would like to add this to the topic:

I also made some BVR/dogfight with the Mirage and i find that the MICA missile is willingly ultra nerfed against AIM-120 to give a chance to the F-16s to avoid them.

We clairly see the MICA speeds up to 2500kts and BAM, it slows down, like it deploys airbrakes or else before impact, a bit like the Mk82 SE/AIR before hitting the ground.
The worst is that its speed drops but it is not when it take altitude but when it’s falling. Even the AIM-120 does not lose speed as fast, even when its falling.

Also I like to add that i was firing very close to the target on purpose to tee to what distance i will hit my target (and the IR).
I was firing at 15nm. I’m sorry but at 15nm with a AIM-120, the IA get destroyed, and more than that -> at 15nm : RUN AWAY

We could believe that the french missiles has been willingly nerfed to offset the advantage of the Mirage 2000 in dogfight against the F-16.
I was litteraly playing with him but in an F-16 (against another human, same level as me), I had diffucult to put myself in his 6.

Link of the tape (VHS file)
http://ww1.blackstorm-universe.net/share-your-files.be/Fichiers/ACMI/TAPE0035.vhs

PS: Same for the IR.

[Axe]

I didn’t see what you saw regarding top airspeeds and quick slowdowns.

For Mica’s EM and IR, I saw top speeds of 1662, 1668, 1728, 1604, 1773, 1583, 1696, 1734.

Checked a few 120 speeds: 1286, 1402, 1374, 1320.

Don’t know why we see different speeds.

I didn’t see any abrupt slowdowns, but watching it I thought they didn’t have the legs of the 120.

I had the impression that regardless of speed, they didn’t seem to keep a track as well as 120’s. (?)

FWIW

[l3crusader]

A quick word to conclude this topic :

Guidance gains of the MICA-IR are very bad, this is why the missile does not correct enough. Since it is lofted, you always have the impression it will pass very high. This is one of the most important issues with missiles ATM.

[thelawenforcer]

does that mean you should try and fire it by taking into account the current flightpath of your target so that it doesnt have to correct as much?

[Dee-Jay]

@thelawenforcer:

does that mean you should try and fire it by taking into account the current flightpath of your target so that it doesnt have to correct as much?

I do not think so. The issue is especially in terminal phase. (Cruz, correct me if I am wrong.)

[l3crusader]

@Dee-Jay:

I do not think so. The issue is especially in terminal phase. (Cruz, correct me if I am wrong.)

Actually, in all phases

Even if you do anticipate, the missile will loft itself and self-induce a wrong course in the vertical plane (in order to gain more range). Its especially true for the MICA-IR, which combines poor guidance gains and a very high loft. Its present but clearly not as much on other missiles.

However, I strongly suspects it is the main thing allowing the “head-on avoidance” for the 120.

[thelawenforcer]

is there any fix for the MICA IR for 4.33? presumably a bit more gain (whatever that is) and a bit less loft would make it a more effective missile? the mirage is already quite weak in some aspects compared to the f-16 (particularly in max speed and slow speed handling)